Did Jurors Talk About Case during Trial Against Judge's Orders?

[Schu7]

Having read this article concerning jury 12
http://fieldnotes.msnbc.msn.com/_ne...iserable-postscript-for-a-casey-anthony-juror

I have several questions.
Her name has not been released, according to the article. Yet, the husband has a manilla envelope with requests from different news organizations all wanting an interview.

How did these news organizations know her name, address, etc?

That is simple to me. There are no offers. There is only the husbands word there was $$$ offers in the manila envelope. And he is lying. Lying to make his wife look good to the press. "She is not a money grabber because she has not taken these offers" - That is the lie he wants out, to help rehabilitate his wife despicable none reputation. Everyone lies in and around this case. It is a blizzard of lying from start to finish.

 

[fundiva]

i predict the rest of this jury will not talk because of the absolutely abhorrent hate being directed toward them, and directed toward ANY and ALL of their valid reasoning. why talk when it falls on deaf ears? JMO.

Good. I don't like to hear excuses for incompetency anway.

 

[Mystic]

Another troubling fact is that the jurors left their notebooks when they went into deliberations. This also leads me to believe they had discussed the case beforehand. If they had not, wouldn't they wish to reference their notes as talking pints during their deliberations?

ITA they only had access to those notebooks during trial to write... so the only time they could review them was in deliberations and they didn't bother taking them???? wth :banghead:

 

[What'sThatClue]

Interesting. I didn't realize they were allowed to use the web.

I believe they were allowed access to the web only to do business and/or pay bills.

 

[3doglady]

ITA they only had access to those notebooks during trial to write... so the only time they could review them was in deliberations and they didn't bother taking them???? wth :banghead:

They didn't need them. Mr. Foreman was in charge and could tell them anything they needed to hear.

 

[Prof]

Having read this article concerning jury 12
http://fieldnotes.msnbc.msn.com/_ne...iserable-postscript-for-a-casey-anthony-juror

I have several questions.
Her name has not been released, according to the article. Yet, the husband has a manilla envelope with requests from different news organizations all wanting an interview.

How did these news organizations know her name, address, etc?

Right after the verdict, every juror and alternate received a press packet when they left the courthouse without being interviewed. The packet would have included requests and interested news media's contact information. The same packet was given to all.

 

[Socprof]

I believe they were allowed access to the web only to do business and/or pay bills.

Couldn't they go online on their phones, anyway? Personal phones are pretty impossible to monitor. It appears to me that there must have been ample discussion during sequestration, and probably some advance agreement to the finding. There is no way that they all arrived to the same (bizarre) conclusion as soon as they sat down. That just makes no sense. I turned off t.v. and avoided all ICA news since last week, including WS. With a clear head, I today believe that something happened here involving tampering and/or jury agreement prior to deliberation.

 

[com n sense]

Couldn't they go online on their phones, anyway? Personal phones are pretty impossible to monitor. It appears to me that there must have been ample discussion during sequestration, and probably some advance agreement to the finding. There is no way that they all arrived to the same (bizarre) conclusion as soon as they sat down. That just makes no sense. I turned off t.v. and avoided all ICA news since last week, including WS. With a clear head, I today believe that something happened here involving tampering and/or jury agreement prior to deliberation.

I am finding it impossible to believe there wasn't any tampering.
Nothing else is making sense to me.

 

[otto]

Whether the jurors discussed the case before they were instructed to deliberate does seem to be becoming a bigger question. Didn't they ask a "we" question in the middle of the trial?

 

[otto]

Right after the verdict, every juror and alternate received a press packet when they left the courthouse without being interviewed. The packet would have included requests and interested news media's contact information. The same packet was given to all.

I guess that explains how the guy that was negotiating 5 figure deals knew who to phone.

Something seems wrong about the picure where a jury is handed "sell your story" info-paks as they conclude their civic duty.

 

[SATA]

Short and sweet, I am convinced the jury discussed the case amongst one another, thus going against the judge´s admonitions.
I think you can deduce that from the few who have spoken in public, I think you can deduce that from their very short deliberations - without asking for ONE piece of evidence or ONE single legal question.
Their minds were already made up. They had already discussed the case.
This jury was a disaster.

 

[erinleigh]

Yes and not a darn thing can be done about it. This case has been frustrating since day 31. So many people willing to toss a baby aside and make this case about them.

 

[miss plum]

They all keep saying the same things. Someone has come up with a narrative and they are all parroting it. It's disturbing to hear a whole lot of different people all say the same few things, after the hours and hours they all sat in court ostensibly listening to many different things, considering they were supposed to not discuss things until deliberation debacle day. Especially since some of these repeated things were repeated ad nauseum in the press throughout the trial, which the jury didn't have access to, but were only said once or twice in court, e.g. some of the opening statements by the defense, a few selected morsels of weak forensic testimony from the defense experts. Why did only those few statements that favored the defense stick in their minds? It is all quite mysterious.

 

[SATA]

Yes and not a darn thing can be done about it. This case has been frustrating since day 31. So many people willing to toss a baby aside and make this case about them.

Children don´t count in our society, children have no rights. I am not sure the verdict would have been so lenient if it were a grown person tossed away to rot in the woods.
And what we have learned from this case is that little kids can be killed and tossed away like garbage without consequence - just as long as the perpetrator is a fierce liar who doesn't budge, and an attractive, petite woman.
I am glad that at the press conference with the Orlando Police Department, they had put up a large poster with Caylee´s picture. That was a good signal.

 

[erinleigh]

Children don´t count in our society, children have no rights. I am not sure the verdict would have been so lenient if it were a grown person tossed away to rot in the woods.
And what we have learned from this case is that little kids can be killed and tossed away like garbage without consequence - just as long as the perpetrator is a fierce liar who doesn't budge, and an attractive, petite woman.
I am glad that at the press conference with the Orlando Police Department, they had put up a large poster with Caylee´s picture. That was a good signal.

What if they felt Caylee has been forgotten in this case so the put her pic up to remind everyone. That would allude to me that in all of the calls they are getting no one is discussing Caylee but instead trying to find a way to make this case about themselves and their potential earnings off of it? I'm so sick of this. I wake up early every morning thinking I can go back in time and change the outcome. Or hear the feds are pursuing charges of lying to FBI. I know I seem obsessed but I feel someone has to do something to show the world this is not ok! I haven't heard 1 report on the injustice done to Caylee. That's why I refuse to watch. Everyone wants the case to be about them. Ie RC and others. I'm glad you feel the way I do it helps to have support

 

[SATA]

What if they felt Caylee has been forgotten in this case so the put her pic up to remind everyone. That would allude to me that in all of the calls they are getting no one is discussing Caylee but instead trying to find a way to make this case about themselves and their potential earnings off of it? I'm so sick of this. I wake up early every morning thinking I can go back in time and change the outcome. Or hear the feds are pursuing charges of lying to FBI. I know I seem obsessed but I feel someone has to do something to show the world this is not ok! I haven't heard 1 report on the injustice done to Caylee. That's why I refuse to watch. Everyone wants the case to be about them. Ie RC and others. I'm glad you feel the way I do it helps to have support

And I am glad you feel that way too. I feel worse and worse about the outcome of the case by the day - just can´t believe it. I don´t think the jury listened to the evidence, they went by their "feeling" that George was lying and that he possibly was behind this. They didn´t LIKE George. But HEY, it isn´t about "liking" people, it is about FACTS.
None of them connected the dots between the, yes, circumstantial evidence, but strong circumstantial evidence and Casey´s PROVEN and OUTRAGEOUS lies! I hope the members of this jury will realize soon that they made a HUGE mistake!

A question: is there a thread about the press conference 7/12?? I cannot find it if there is.
Thanks in advance.

 

[Nenato5]

What if they felt Caylee has been forgotten in this case so the put her pic up to remind everyone. That would allude to me that in all of the calls they are getting no one is discussing Caylee but instead trying to find a way to make this case about themselves and their potential earnings off of it? I'm so sick of this. I wake up early every morning thinking I can go back in time and change the outcome. Or hear the feds are pursuing charges of lying to FBI. I know I seem obsessed but I feel someone has to do something to show the world this is not ok! I haven't heard 1 report on the injustice done to Caylee. That's why I refuse to watch. Everyone wants the case to be about them. Ie RC and others. I'm glad you feel the way I do it helps to have support

One reason LE's news conference yesterday impressed me--the large picture of Caylee was prominently displayed--their investigation was about HER.

 

[Bobbisangel]

I believe they did discuss the trial.. there is no way all 12 of them on their own thought she was not guilty... no way

I agree and I also believe juror #3 and the foreperson were pushy and probably stayed on the people who were going to vote guilty until they changed their minds. I don't know what the juror's number was but she is a woman in her 60's that quit her job because of the attitude of her co-workers and her fear...she said she would never be on a jury again. I wonder if that is because of two pushy jurors?

 

[Nenato5]

Does anyone believe that the jury might not have been as sequestered as we tend to think? After all, this is the electronic age, each juror was in a private room, and smartphones are everywhere. At this point, I am very suspicious of the foreman. Could some of the jurors been intimidated? The poor lady who packed up and left Florida said she would rather be in jail than serve on another jury, according to her husband. Did she leave in fear of the verdict, or in fear of what went on in the jury room? IMHO, something is very wrong here.

 

[hornswoggled]

I do believe they talked among themselves before they were supposed to. How else could they have all agreed they wanted to inspect the heart sticker while the trial was still going on? Even CM questioned that one. Such a small insignificant piece of evidence. When they asked to see the sticker, I mistakenly thought that this jury would inspect many pieces of evidence. I would have thought they would want to inspect the duct tape........, but all they ever looked at was one little heart sticker.

I have tried not to watch too much coverage since the trial. I have tried to divert my attention by watching old movies. Today I watched "The Dirty Dozen", not realizing the irony until after I had finished watching it. So the jurors are still on my mind. How much circumstantial evidence does a jury need to come to a guilty of (something/anythng) verdict? The fact they found her guilty of lying to LE should tell them something. They had already dismissed Jose's "reason" for the cover-up. So did they even discuss why Casey would go to such lengths to lie to LE?

So they believe Caylee drowned, but they didn't buy Jose's explanation of why Casey lied about it and sat in jail for 3 years. The sad truth of the matter is that she would be partying her a$$ off until this day if no one had called in the cops. I guess they never discussed her level of anger at getting the police involved. Oh. I forgot. We all grieve differently. BS.